"ה מִסִּינַי בָּא -- the meaning is that Hashem was revealed to me here, such that I should bless Israel, and thus, my blessing is from the mouth of the One On High. And he said that 'He came from Sinai', which was the place where Hashem revealed Himself first. And when He came here, behold His Glory rose and shone forth from Seir and Paran, which are between Har Sinai and Har Nevo. And came unto them, for the sake of Israel, in order to bless them.

מִימִינוֹ,אֵשׁ דָּת -- From the right of this Eshdat HaPisgah, which Moshe was standing then at its base. And the meaning of mentioning the right is that Sinai, Seir, and Paran are all to the south of Har Nevo, and the south is called right while the north is called left. And the intent is not at all to matan Torah. For if so, it should have said el-Sinai, 'to Sinai', not miSina, 'from Sinai'.

אֵשׁדָּת is written as a single word. And it is from Ashdot HaPisgah, {the slopes of Pisgah} {in Devarim 3:17:

17 the Arabah also, the Jordan being the border thereof, from Chinnereth even unto the sea of the Arabah, the Salt Sea, under the slopes of Pisgah eastward.

The vav of מִימִינוֹ is in the same manner of Beno Beor {Bemidbar 24:3, נְאֻם בִּלְעָם בְּנוֹ בְעֹר}. And initially the vav was the vav of attribution {I would guess he means the genitive case, connoting possession}, in the same manner of {Shir Hashirim 3:7}, מִטָּתוֹ שֶׁלִּשְׁלֹמֹה {with the vav ending}, which is in the manner of the Aramaic language, as in Daniel 2:20:

29 Therefore I make a decree, that every people, nation, and language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill; because there is no other god that is able to deliver after this sort.'

{where the cholam nun-sofit implies 'their God', even though it is immediately followed by דִּי-שַׁדְרַךְ מֵישַׁךְ וַעֲבֵד נְגוֹא.}

And, with the passage of time, its initial import was forgotten and it turned to be an extraneous letter. Therefore we find it as well by a noun which is feminine, such as {Bereishit 1:24}

24 And God said: 'Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind.' And it was so.

And so too here, מִימִינוֹ,אֵשׁדָּת.

The word dat is not of the Hebrew language nor of the Aramaic language, but rather of the Persian language.

{Josh: To interject, this explanation by is not in accordance with the trup. First off, note the zakef-gadol on the word מִימִינוֹ. As a melech, it severs the word from the אֵשׁדָּת which follows it. Furthermore, there are two trup marks on the word אֵשׁדָּת, one on the אֵשׁ and one on the דָּת. That implies that these are two words, rather than a single word.}

The trup marks always agree with the krei. And here, the krei is esh dat, with two words. Therefore, perforce, the trup cannot agree with my explanation.

אֵשׁדָּת with a tav is not the construct form, such as {Tehillim 60:13}:

6 And the stability of thy times shall be a hoard of salvation--wisdom and knowledge, and the fear of the LORD which is His treasure. {P}

{where chochmat is 'wisdom', not 'wisdom of X'} and others like them."

End quote of Shadal.

For an example of someone who explicitly rejects the theory of Eshdat meaning 'slopes' as in Ashdot HaPisgah, see Ibn Janach:

"Eshdat is not from the language of Ashdot HaPishgah {Devarim 3:13}, as Avi Amar Ibn Yakvi had explained {that it was}. For they are two words grafted together, as the Targum and the author of the masorah had said, and it is the truth. (Sefer HaShorashim, 48)"

For a little bit more on on this Ibn Yakwi, see here, and in the footnote there:

Update: In the comment section, S. brings a nice idea by R' Eliyahu Bachur, in his commentary on Radak's sefer HaShorashim. See there, and this image, that does not list אשדת amongst other דת instances, because he regards it as a single word, as it is written, and from the language to ashdot hapisgah:

If so, here is someone else, a well-known Rishon, who endorses this.

Perhaps. Omission of a word is not necessarily compelling evidence. Does he list it under aleph for אשדות? Is there such an entry?

Recent Posts

YESHIVA WORLD NEWS

Followers

about

parshablog is published by (rabbi) josh waxman (joshwaxman [at] yahoo [dot] com), a grad student in Revel, a grad student in a Phd program in computer science at CUNY. i recently received semicha from RIETS. this blog is devoted to parsha as well as whatever it is i am currently learning.